About your Search

20130211
20130219
STATION
CSPAN 3
CSPAN2 3
MSNBC 2
MSNBCW 2
CNN 1
CNNW 1
LANGUAGE
English 16
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
. they came up with instead a very, very weak answer. harry reid caved into the republicans on this, i hate to say it. sol many democrats were saying this is going to be fine because now, we all agree that you need 60. we didn't get rid of it. they can use it. they don't have to come to the floor and talk at that talk, but it's going to work. it's going to work because republicans have greedp agreed they will filibuster for stuff that's really important. when harry reid and mitch mcconnell agree this is really worth it. damn if, we said at the time this was phony, it was not going to work, it was not going to make any change. republicans were going to abuse it. they would never abide by that agreement. two weeks ago. republicans trotted it out yesterday, put a filibuster on the nomination of chuck hagel to be our next secretary of defense, and they won. you need 60 votes to get over it. and the most they could get with the democrats and four republicans was 58 votes t he lost by one vote. harry reid ended up having to vote no. that way, by voting know he
majority leader harry reid had to switch his vote to know to bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recess. you have a lot of republican senators who said as recently as last week that they did not want to see the choice filibuster. even if they wanted to vote no, he at least deserved an uptown vote to be approved. there was no precedent -- precedent to filibuster president's choice like this. the republicans decided they wanted to try to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on the issues like the terrorist attack on benghazi in september. they submitted to passing hagel when they come back. it way you're looking at, is delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed as defense secretary. he is just going to get to wait 11 days. to me, it seems like you should confirm him, because you're going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from t
, harry reid, and said this is the solution. >> all right. meanwhile, senator lindsay graham is suggesting one potential -- >> i'm sorry, could i interrupt? i had a munchkin in my mouth. >> no, you can't have those. you're supposed to have your greek yogurt. >> i'm trying to make a point with a visual aid. this is like defense spending. done. gone. >> before the day has even started, you've just -- give those to me. >> i'm not homer simpson. what do you make of what woodward said? >> the president's in charge. he's got to figure out a way to stop the sequester. i think the symbolism of the last couple weeks haven't been great. he's not really out there leading a new path towards figuring out how to avoid something he says is a bad idea and promised as a candidate wouldn't happen. >> okay. john, joe's mouth is full. what do you think? >> i'm hap think the sequester be a bad thing. >> everyone says that. who's going to take the blame? who should? >> if it ends up going into effect, i think they're all going to take a lot of blame and they should. it's fair enough to say, if bob's reporting i
and harry reid and the hl said in the last few days we don't have a spending problem. this will hurt in places. at the end of the day it's unclear how much people will blame the president or the republicans for what. they think we have a spending problem. >> great thing about everybody wants, thinks ve a revenue problem. spending problem. this is great until it's their thing that got cut. my job or my social security or medicare or whatever the cut is. everybody thinking we have a spending problem until it happens. the cuts come and price to play and then we blame somebody. there is blame on both sides but that is the politics. >> bret: does it happen? >> i think there will be -- we have sequestration. >> does it happen? >> absolutely. we needed presidential leadership for 18 months to avoid this. the president is nowhere, never presented a plan. last week they asked in congress testimony what is the number attached to the president's plan and he said we have never seen a president plan. avoid it. >> thank you. coming up, sig, assigning blamer war crimes in syria. [ male announcer ]
, and the reason why it was 58 votes is because harry reid switched his vote to no soap the senate can bring it back up again. you have a lot of republican senators who were saying last week that they did not want to see it go up in filibuster. at least it would be an up-down of the to be approved. there was no precedent to filibuster a choice like this. and the republicans decided they wanted to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on issues like the terrorist attack in benghazi in september, and so they are committed to passing a goal when they come back. the way you are looking at it, it is a tedious exercise in delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed. he will just have to wait 11 days. you should confirm him because you are going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. host: harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from the white house, more details about what the president did and did not do
will be debating chuck hagel's domination as defense secretary. the vote after they finish talks. harry reid says the full senate could vote on the nomination as early as tomorrow. hagel, former republican senator from nebraska, faces strong opposition from fellow republicans. >>> north korea thumbing its nose at the u.s. and the international community by carrying out a new, more powerful nuclear test. it is the first one under leader kim jong-un. president obama calls it a threat to the u.s. security and world peace. the first indication of the underground test came when seismologists detected a tremor in an area that is not known for earthquakes into in jerusalem, ten women detained at the western wall. one of them happens to be the sister of comedian sarah silverman. police detained rabbi silverman praying at the wall wearing a prayer shawl only worn by men. they were released several hours later. i don't care much for people who use religion as a cloak to justify hatred, injustice and fear and i can't imagine god, should he or she or it exist, does either. i am so proud of my sister and niec
out on this question, i agree with senator harry reid. when it came to the nomination of john bold, and in a of members of this body asked for additional disclosures from john bolton, and those disclosures were not forthcoming. harry reid said the following, the administration stonewalling has no one had the effect of slowing down the confirmation process, it has also put a further cloud over this individual and perhaps unnecessarily, raised the impression that the nominee and the white house have something to hide. i don't know if mr. hagel has received funds directly or indirectly from foreign sources, from extreme sources, but his refusal to provide disclosure i think is highly troubling. and i would suggest every member of this committee and every member of this body should stand together and at least insisting on adequate disclosure. i'll make one final point. some have asked, would you make the same request of a republican nominee? i'll point out you can chuck hagel is a republican. i don't know him personally, unlike many members of this committee. isa limit was record, and
, chris, something that stood out to me is the backbone of harry reid. had he perhaps more of a backbone during these filibuster negotiations, and filibuster reform, perhaps he wouldn't be sitting here having this discussion anyway, and some of the fault, maybe a large portion of the fault lay with harry reid for us even having this discussion this morning? >> well, in fairness, look, both sides have threatened to do something about the filibuster and both sides are reluctant to do it, because quite frankly, they know the once that were in the majority now know at some point they'll be in the minority and vice versa and you know, there is some deference made to some rules of the senate and one of the things they all say if we'd stop the filibuster we'd become just like the house and i promise you on in congress on capitol hill that's not a compliment. >> is there any merit to what democrats are saying about the g.o.p. blocking this and putting the country at risk 'cause it's such an important security post? >> no, i mean, for one thing, the senate democrats said well, we're not going to
have barack obama who is a democrat, president of the united states. then we have harry reid who is the majority leader. so the democrats are in control of both. now, if you think back at what happened back in -- during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states and the democrats were a minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had bolton come up, john bolton. same thing, subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- dirk kempthorne. all remember dirk kempthorne. there are a lot of people who did not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here, the democrats didn't like him, they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. this isn't a filibuster today. people are trying to say that and blame me as being the bad guy that's causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. any more than it was the case back in the 2005-2006 and other times when we had a nominee that was put forth by president bush. it was objected to by the democrats. now, di
united, and they're going home. i am sure we can get harry reid, he will come back as the speaker will join with us in supporting the plan that the house and senate democrats and the president supports to avoid the sequester and avoid 750,000 americans losing their jobs. we will do it. they put a plan on their table, we put a plan on the table, the house has put zero plans on the table. >> they always talk about what they did in the last congress. those bills are gone. they keep pointing to them as if somehow magically they are going to be resurrected. if they want to resurrect them, put them on the floor and let's vote. >> it is often talked about, sequestration, and we have heard so much about the sequester. will you lay out areas that are most important to democrats that the sequester will impact? >> i will defer to our budget chair because he has worked with all of our caucus on this, but i know other members will be talking about it, and that is where the rubber meets the road in the appropriations committee. that we say, since you mentioned education, when they talk about cu
's the interesting thing. if you look today we have barack obama, democrat president of the united states. and harry reid the majority leader. and the democrats are in control of both. if you think back at what happened back in during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states, and the democrats were the minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had both come up. john bolton same thing. subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- we remember dirk, there a lot of people that it not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here the democrats didn't like him. they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. it's not a filibuster today. people are trying to blame me the bad guy causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. it anymore the case than the 2005, 2006, and other times when we had a nominee put forth by president wush who was objected to by the democrat. dirk when he was nominated to be the secretary of entire job, there was a lot of opposition to the
haven't seen a solution from the president or harry reid. the republicans have put our plan on the table and passed it through the house of representatives. now it is incumbent upon the president to show leadership. >> let's turn to hagel. the nomination of course something taken up once the break is over. this is bob woodward on fox news talking about democratic senators calling the white house asking if hagel was going to withdraw. this is what he said was the white house response. >> the answer is an emphatic no. remember john urlicman used to talk about twisting slowly in the wind. >> why wouldn't the white house jump to hagel's defense? >> i think they have. had john mccain out this weekend. the expectation is that senator hagel is going to -- that vote is going to happen and he will be our next secretary of defense. what i think is deplorable and john mccain was very honest this weekend and part of what prompted some of democrat's questions. republicans made it clear this is a grudge match. lindsey graham is saying he is not going to vote on this or won't move on this until he find
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)